Subject: Re: Licence question - Linux sources
To: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Manuel Bouyer <email@example.com>
Date: 03/07/2000 20:34:38
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 10:30:02AM -0800, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> I think things might have changed with GPL version 2, but GPL version 1
> did NOT require everything else be GPL'd, just everything else had to be
> as free as the GPL. The advertizing clause Berkeley added to its license
> was not that free, thus the GPL & Berkeley licenses don't mix problem.
> Note that most of our ext2fs support came right out of the Linux kernel -
> those files weren't GPL'd. They just were as free as the GPL.
That's not true: I rewrote ext2 support from scratch.
Manuel Bouyer, LIP6, Universite Paris VI. Manuel.Bouyer@lip6.fr